ILNews

Court rules on med mal statute of limitations

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
The Indiana Court of Appeals today reversed and remanded to Lake Circuit Court a medical malpractice case, holding that it is unconstitutional to apply the state statute's "occurrence-based" nature to the man suing a surgeon.

In Victor Herron v. Anthony A. Anigbo, M.D. http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/05230712jsk.pdf , No. 45A03-0608-CV-378, the three-judge panel ruled the trial court erred in concluding that Herron's discovery date allowed for sufficient knowledge to discover the malpractice.

The suit stems from Herron's fall outside his home and his admittance to a Merrillville hospital in March 2002. He underwent surgical procedures by Dr. Anigbo and was discharged three weeks later to another facility, though he continued on a ventilator for nine months. In June 2003, Herron went to another doctor to determine if he was fit to be released to a rehabilitation facility; the doctor determined he wasn't. Another doctor advised Herron in November 2003 that Dr. Anigbo's negligent follow-up care had caused the deterioration.

The trial court determined the discovery date was in June of 2003 rather than November.

In determining if Herron had sufficient opportunity to bring his claim before the March 2004 statute of limitations expiration, the court wrote, "We conclude that he did not. It was not until the two-year anniversary of the injury that (another doctor) reported Herron was recovering well and that no new problems had manifested."
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. He did not have an "unlicensed handgun" in his pocket. Firearms are not licensed in Indiana. He apparently possessed a handgun without a license to carry, but it's not the handgun that is licensed (or registered).

  2. Once again, Indiana's legislature proves how friendly it is to monopolies. This latest bill by Hershman demonstrates the lengths Indiana's representatives are willing to go to put big business's (especially utilities') interests above those of everyday working people. Maassal argues that if the technology (solar) is so good, it will be able to compete on its own. Too bad he doesn't feel the same way about the industries he represents. Instead, he wants to cut the small credit consumers get for using solar in order to "add a 'level of certainty'" to his industry. I haven't heard of or seen such a blatant money-grab by an industry since the days when our federal, state, and local governments were run by the railroad. Senator Hershman's constituents should remember this bill the next time he runs for office, and they should penalize him accordingly.

  3. From his recent appearance on WRTV to this story here, Frank is everywhere. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy, although he should stop using Eric Schnauffer for his 7th Circuit briefs. They're not THAT hard.

  4. They learn our language prior to coming here. My grandparents who came over on the boat, had to learn English and become familiarize with Americas customs and culture. They are in our land now, speak ENGLISH!!

  5. @ Rebecca D Fell, I am very sorry for your loss. I think it gives the family solace and a bit of closure to go to a road side memorial. Those that oppose them probably did not experience the loss of a child or a loved one.

ADVERTISEMENT